Jump to content

Defense Discussion [2017]

CentralFC

By CentralFC
in Green Bay Packers

Recommended Posts

Dubz41

Dubz41

Posted
Posted

It'll be interesting to see who they add in the draft this year.  BUT....all this defense needs is cohesion and direction.  Something that Capers is NOT providing.  A little more nasty would be good also.  We can't get off the field on third down and that is directly the coordinators responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
incognito_man

incognito_man

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

This is very much revisionist history.

In 2014 we were a middle of the road defense at 18th in points per drive. 

In 2015 we were a good defense at 11th in points per drive.

In 2016 we were an awful defense at 29th in points per drive.

In 2016 we did not have Shields. He was out for the year. Clay Matthews started 9 games and played only 46% of snaps. Nick Perry started 12 games and played only 59% of snaps.

When we had Shields, Matthews, Peppers, and Perry, this was a very good defense. If you want to argue that the defense under achieved in 2014 based on the talent on the roster, I will not disagree with you. But, you must also acknowledge that we had an above average defense in 2015.

It's not revisionist history. It's not alternative fact.

It's just flat wrong. A lie. Dishonest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
th87

th87

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

This is very much revisionist history.

In 2014 we were a middle of the road defense at 18th in points per drive. 

In 2015 we were a good defense at 11th in points per drive.

In 2016 we were an awful defense at 29th in points per drive.

In 2016 we did not have Shields. He was out for the year. Clay Matthews started 9 games and played only 46% of snaps. Nick Perry started 12 games and played only 59% of snaps.

When we had Shields, Matthews, Peppers, and Perry, this was a very good defense. If you want to argue that the defense under achieved in 2014 based on the talent on the roster, I will not disagree with you. But, you must also acknowledge that we had an above average defense in 2015.

23, 14, 16 in weighted DVOA (which emphasizes how teams closed out the year), for the years in question (in reverse order). 

Average to below average for four years running.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacReady

MacReady

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

This is very much revisionist history.

In 2014 we were a middle of the road defense at 18th in points per drive.

And that doesn't consider how MUCH better we were at the end of that year.  But, the same problems were there even in 2014.  Before I get into this I'll say that I mostly agree with you, but I don't care because a better DC could have had that team at top 5 in points per drive.

In 2014, w gave up 44 points to the Saints and 37 points to the Falcons.  It's been three years and we still don't have an answer for the Falcons, and we barely have an answer for the Saints. 

Now look at that roster. 

Barrington/Matthews at ILB.  That's top 16 in the league. 

Peppers/Perry pass rushers, again top 16. 

Guion/Daniels/Jones

Hayward, House, Tramon Williams, Sam Shields, Clinton-Dix, Burnett.  Makes me want to cry how talented that secondary was.

2015 is the only year in which our talent level was close to matching our production on defense. 

So my question is, why do people keep defending this defense based on the talent level it has had?  2016 is the only legitimate "free pass" season due to injuries.  How many teams can expect to be able to add an elite pass rusher at will in order to fix their defense? 

What happens when we add a first round pass rusher who gets 10 sacks as a rookie and we finish somewhere between 16th and 24th on defense because we lost Burnett to free agency, then add a safety the following year and finish 24th-32nd because Perry had a down year and then we go back up to 15th-20th because we don't stay healthy...

If our coordinator was good (good, has his team instead of lost his team, whatever you want to call it), there would be one outlier in which we outperformed.  That hasn't happened yet.  2015 looked like we had an elite secondary.  Shields, Hayward, Hyde, Randall, Burnett, Clinton-Dix...

We have never outperformed the talent we've had defensively.

Would anybody argue that the following players showed Hall of Fame potential if the season was extrapolated to a career in the year 2010:

BJ Raji, Charles Woodson, Nick Collins, Clay Matthews, Cullen Jenkins. 

So even with five Hall of Fame seasons, plus pro bowls seasons by Bishop, Williams, Shields... We still finished second, not first but second, in points per game.

How many times does that happen?  There were literally three Hall of Fame players on that team if Collins didn't get injured.  Woodson is a first ballot hall of fame player.  Collins would have been.  Matthews is getting in regardless of what anyone here thinks and regardless of whether or not he deserves it (personality, team success, 3 dominant seasons, pro bowls, stats). 

Hell, Capers had the defensive player of the year in 2009, plus Clay Matthews plus Collins plus a bunch of other GREAT players and he still managed 14th in points allowed.

Capers has consistently fielded a result that underachieves based on the talent available. 

The Patriots have three players that match up with the talent the Packers have right now.  Otherwise, they literally have players nobody else wanted.  Practice squad guys, second round busts... Vic Fangio has who on that defense? 

I'm not arguing scheme.  If you think there isn't more to a coordinator than scheme, you're wrong.  He doesn't have a team anymore because he's lost his team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacReady

MacReady

Posted
Posted

I know PFF is highly frowned upon here, but it's more evidence for my case, so I'm going to give it.

Kenny Clark - 88
Mike Daniels - 88
Clay Matthews - 84
Morgan Burnett - 81
Nick Perry - 81
Blake Martinez - 80
Jake Ryan - 77
Clinton-Dix - 77
Damarious Randall - 61
Davon House - 54
Josh Jones - 45

Average of 74 for individual performances. 

Compare this to the Steelers starting 11

Heyward - 88.8
Tuitt - 88.2
Shazier - 84
Hargrave - 79
Watt - 77
Burns - 75
Mitchell - 62
Dupree - 48
Sensabaugh - 49
Davis - 38
Spence - 29

Average of 65 for individual performances. 

Yet Pittsburgh is 7th in points allowed.  We're 21st. 

I know people will pick on PFF, but that's at least one metric that shows we are having better individual performances than better defenses.  Can you find any evidence to suggest I'm wrong? 

Also, I'm really happy because I feel vindicated for my defense of Clay Matthews.  PFF gets paid money to offer this service, so to everybody that's watching the all-22 saying Clay is done for, how much you get paid to watch and grade him?  The only complaint I seem to see about PFF is that it does a really bad job grading secondaries.  If Matthews is getting an 84 rating, he must be doing something right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Norm

Norm

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Stevein2012 said:

If Capers is here next season I can't wait to see what wacky unusual formation we come out with.  Maybe something called ultra-nitro flip formation with the front 4 all Safeties and Daniels/Clark at ILB.  Then all other LB playing press coverage.

Why does anyone care he names them these things?

If he didn't call them some"cool" name would it be okay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stevein2012

Stevein2012

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, NormSizedMidget said:

Why does anyone care he names them these things?

If he didn't call them some"cool" name would it be okay?

you don't like my name?  If you think of a better one feel free.  I'm pretty certain in my fake scenario people would be more upset with the 4 safety front formation  than the name but if that's what you wanna focus on go ahead lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Norm

Norm

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Stevein2012 said:

you don't like my name?  If you think of a better one feel free.  I'm pretty certain in my fake scenario people would be more upset with the 4 safety front formation  than the name but if that's what you wanna focus on go ahead lol.

Nah but people always pick on it, like it matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...